Live data from Hacker News

Successful room temperature ambient-pressure magnetic levitation of LK-99

arxiv.org

821–830 of 1001 posts

Re: Successful room temperature ambient-pressure magnetic levitation of LK-99

#821

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a quite biased view. As a non-Chinese scientist, I can attest that there is intense pressure to publish as many papers as possible pretty much everywhere , and this leads to a problem of bad research across the world. China may be among the worst offenders in this respect, but the particular thing the OP is asking about doesn't strike me as a Chinese-specific thing at all. I see non-Chinese scientists rushing…

It's not biased, it's a fact. I see it all the time as PC/AC/reviwer/etc. There is deluge of terrible papers from China that are just a mess, below any imaginable standard. Ones that labs in the EU/US/Russia/Japan/etc. don't put out. Yes, everyone has to publish, and there are bad papers out there, but the volume and low quality from China is unmatched.

[deleted]

Re: Successful room temperature ambient-pressure magnetic levitation of LK-99

#822
post #638

Earlier quoted context omitted.

very interesting, is there a an article about it?

not an article, but there's a tweet (yeah oftentimes Twitter can be useful :) ): https://nitter.net/sanxiyn/status/1686782919178911744

I found it extremely entertaining to follow the twitter epopeea around Lk99 topic. Apparently the Iris posts were not just empty words and trolling.

Re: Successful room temperature ambient-pressure magnetic levitation of LK-99

#823

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would have been more convincing if you had given real past examples rather than speculative future ones :) Although I'm pretty sure there are plenty that many people can think of, so it doesn't really detract much from your point.

Auctions, sanitary towels, retirement, banking, disposable razor, sewing machine, canned food, interchangeable parts, antibiotics, solar cells, postage stamp, light bulb, pencil, air conditioning, insurance, dwarf wheat, spreadsheet, cold chain, double entry book-keeping, S-bend, infant formula, clocks, public key cryptography, passports, batteries, printing press, video games, GPS, contraceptive pill, shipping conta…

Computing/computers?! Ironic that no mention here. Nor in additional comments.

Re: Successful room temperature ambient-pressure magnetic levitation of LK-99

#824

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's an oddly defensive take.

Only because I was responding to an oddly offensive take.

Not really though. Bad science comes from all over the world. It's bizarre to think that there couldn't be a Chinese Jan Hendrik Schön.

Re: Successful room temperature ambient-pressure magnetic levitation of LK-99

#825
post #458

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The conductors of your ohmmeter are not that important, though. You can work around that by using four-terminal sensing, and you can of course also calibrate your probes by directly touching them together. Even if your ohmmeter conductors have a resistance of several ohm, you could still get an accurate measurement if your tool has a high enough resolution. A bigger issue is going to be sample size. A 1mm-diameter 1m…

How about the wires connected to your probes? Or the internal electronics that are used to gauge resistance? How do you work around those?

Calibration. But electric fields across wiring in such sensitive applications is a real problem.

Re: Successful room temperature ambient-pressure magnetic levitation of LK-99

#826

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not an expert, but I would guess a direct measurement couldn't distinguish between a true superconductor and something with very very low resistance.

No. Any device to measuring resistence ALWAYS have a minimal value that can measure. They can never measure exactly zero ohms.

Isn't that exactly what I said?

Re: Successful room temperature ambient-pressure magnetic levitation of LK-99

#827

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, good points though the money angle is debatable. The USA and Europe are 'on average' also more pro-science than the rest of the world, but I think the East has the edge in education and comes across as more focused on progress. Probably this is underpinned in part because they have a ton of very hard problems that need solving and in the 'rich West' people are much less driven because their lives and the lives o…

One difference I’ve found living in the West and China is that being academically successful often gets you made fun of in the US but adored in China. There’s quite a lot of anti-intellectualism in the US. Therefore, there’s an equal amount of anti-science. Meanwhile, every Chinese I’ve ever met is pro-education and thinks highly of science.

You should see the look on my parents' HK church friends whenever I unintentionally start talking about science, it's like I said a swear word.

Re: Successful room temperature ambient-pressure magnetic levitation of LK-99

#828

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would have been more convincing if you had given real past examples rather than speculative future ones :) Although I'm pretty sure there are plenty that many people can think of, so it doesn't really detract much from your point.

Auctions, sanitary towels, retirement, banking, disposable razor, sewing machine, canned food, interchangeable parts, antibiotics, solar cells, postage stamp, light bulb, pencil, air conditioning, insurance, dwarf wheat, spreadsheet, cold chain, double entry book-keeping, S-bend, infant formula, clocks, public key cryptography, passports, batteries, printing press, video games, GPS, contraceptive pill, shipping conta…

In the grand tradition of podcasts being a single wikipedia page stretched out to an hour long podcast (which is freaking 90% of "tech" podcasts), this one is apparently an hour long podcast from reading the tech tree of Sid Meier's Civilization.

Re: Successful room temperature ambient-pressure magnetic levitation of LK-99

#829
post #601
post #470

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Things also tend to be invented at about the same time at different places. I wonder if there are other people who were this close to invent it but just couldn't get it right.

Apparently the theory behind LK-99 was inspired by the studies from Eastern European scientists. However, after the Soviet collapse, the study was lost.

The twitter thread linked below says that it was an independent discovery and the Korean professor was not aware of the prior knowledge until after the discovery, so it's not inspired as much as parallel development.

Re: Successful room temperature ambient-pressure magnetic levitation of LK-99

#830
post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the career implications for rushing something out that is later found lacking is not great. On a tangent, this idea of reputation keeps on coming up in this whole discussion and I am burdened by it in a way I don't fully understand. The way people have talked, if this LK-99 doesn't work out, then it is almost as if those who published this did something _morally_ wrong. Well, morally wrong is not quite true, but th…

It's a direct side effect of reputation and funding being closely correlated: if your reputation is that you put out stuff that doesn't work you won't get funded. This is dumb, but that's how the world works. That's why you almost always see the 'more research is needed' line in various papers, it is most helpful when seeking for funding that one paper will lead to another. But (unfortunately) negative results aren't…

> It's a direct side effect of reputation and funding being closely correlated

This sheds some light on it to me. I guess what partly surprises me is that people seem to care more about reputation than just a means for improving the signal to noise ratio in papers or as a estimate on what will give you your biggest bang for your buck.

The other issue I see come up is the idea that if there is no signal to noise filter, then a scientist might "waste their time," either reading the paper or trying to replicate. But to me, it sounds a little bit like trying to avoid actually doing science. And peer reviewed papers don't imply excellent quality either. You should evaluate papers on their merits. It is your job, as a scientist, to evaluate the most productive approaches based on the merits of the science being done, not based on reputation.

Post reply on HN